Creativity
Do self-assessment mind maps boost kids' belief in their creativity?
Open access · cc by · source: Europe PMC
Children who regularly filled in reflective mind maps during English class kept or slightly raised their belief that they could be creative, while a comparison class's belief fell, but the maps did not clearly improve English confidence or exam results.
Study at a glance
- Design
- Human experiment — Quasi-experiment with two intact classes: one class assigned to 8 weeks of twice-weekly self-assessment mind maps, the other to normal teaching; pre/post surveys and school exams analysed with ANCOVA
- N
- N=51 · 55 students enrolled; 51 analysed (20 in the mind-map class after 4 exclusions for missing post-data, 31 in the control class)
- Population
- Primary 4 students (ages 8-11) in two English classes taught by the same teacher in Hong Kong
- Outcome
- Self-efficacy in creativity (5-item scale), self-efficacy in learning English (MSLQ subscale), and school English exam scores
Structured fields used in claim comparison tables when every cited study has a complete layer.
Key findings
After controlling for pretest scores, the mind-map class scored 0.54 points higher than the control class on creative self-efficacy, a medium-sized effect; this was mostly because the control class's scores dropped while the mind-map class's rose non-significantly. Self-efficacy in learning English fell in both classes, with no significant group difference. Both classes improved on the English exam and the mind-map class gained more from a much lower starting point, but because the group effect depended on starting scores the authors call the achievement result inconclusive.
Methodology
Two fourth-grade English classes with the same teacher were assigned by class to either an intervention or a control condition. For 8 weeks, the intervention class completed a mind-map template twice a week that prompted them to name the lesson theme, note what they learned, what confused them, and who or what could help them; the teacher gave no feedback on the maps. Before and after, students rated their creative self-efficacy and their self-efficacy in learning English, and their school exam scores served as the achievement measure.
Limitations
Only two intact classes were compared, so class-level differences (the classes started far apart on English scores) are confounded with the intervention, and individual students were never randomised. Group sizes were small (20 versus 31), which limits statistical power, and four intervention students were dropped for missing data. Outcomes were self-report scales and ordinary school exams not designed around the taught content, and the study cannot say which part of the intervention (mind mapping, self-assessment, or simply extra reflective activity) drove the creative self-efficacy difference.
How this study connects
Role on claims
Each row is a claim on a concept or method page where this paper supports, challenges, or qualifies the statement. Roles are hand-checked — not a model guess.
Not yet placed on a claim. This paper has study layers, but no concept page yet cites it as support, challenge, or qualifier.
Related papers in this topic
Same topic cluster — not a recommendation engine.